History
  • No items yet
midpage
Sensenig v. Parry
113 Pa. 115
Pa.
1886
Check Treatment

The opinion of the Court was filed

Pee Curiam.

There was no error in disallowing the evidence of counsel fee paid by the plaintiff. It is not such legal damage as is specified in the condition of the injunction bond, as to permit a recovery therefor: Good v. Mylin, 8 Pa. St., 51; Stopp v. Smith, 71 Id., 285. All other alleged damages “ sustained by reason of such injunction ” was a question of fact, and the evidence relating thereto was submitted to the jury in a clear and correct charge. There was no error in the admission of evidence tending to disprove damages.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Sensenig v. Parry
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: May 31, 1886
Citation: 113 Pa. 115
Court Abbreviation: Pa.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.